Opinion
Column

Suzuki is right about Trudeau

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau walks on the Ujibashi bridge as he visits at the Ise-Jingu Shrine on May 26, 2016 in Ise, Japan. In the two-day summit, the G7 leaders are scheduled to discuss global issues including counter-terrorism, energy policy, and sustainable development. (Photo by Chung Sung-Jun/Getty Images)

In a recent Huffington Post column, David Suzuki said while Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has been meeting with the United Nations, the premiers and the leaders of the U.S. and Mexico to talk about climate change, he’s done nothing.

He’s right. As Canada’s most famous environmentalist put it:

“So, how much better is Canada’s climate target than before the Liberals swept to power? Astonishingly, not one bit. Despite all the activity that has taken place, Canada is ignoring its greenhouse gas emissions reduction goal.

“The (UN) Paris Agreement doesn’t include individual national promises. Those have been made and tabled with the UN climate secretariat. Canada’s target was tabled in May, 2015 by former environment minister Leona Aglukkaq. It’s the weakest in the G7. Of course, the previous government made few plans and took no steps to hit its mark. But the Harper government’s goal of reducing emissions 30% below 2005 levels by 2030 is still Canada’s target. So while the premiers are building a plan, they’re building it to hit the old, weak target.”

Two points here.

First, it was the previous Liberal government under Jean Chretien and Paul Martin that set impossible-to-achieve emission reduction targets for Canada under the now-defunct Kyoto accord, did nothing to achieve them, and then handed off the whole mess to Stephen Harper in 2006, who would have had to bankrupt the country to reach them.

Second, while Trudeau and Climate Change Minister Catherine McKenna will introduce Canada’s climate change strategy -- including a national carbon price -- this fall, the provinces aren’t even meeting what Suzuki describes as the weak Harper/Trudeau target.

Both B.C. Premier Christy Clark, whose province already has a carbon tax, and Ontario Premier Kathleen Wynne, who will introduce cap-and-trade (a carbon tax by another name) next year, have warned the feds there’s no point in setting steeper targets when they aren’t meeting the existing ones.

Saskatchewan Premier Brad Wall opposes a national carbon tax, saying he will challenge it in court if the feds act unilaterally.

Other premiers have expressed reservations about a national carbon tax infringing on their right to develop their own climate change policies.

Small wonder.

B.C.’s revenue neutral carbon tax, $30 per tonne of industrial carbon dioxide emissions, is currently the highest in Canada, but the B.C. government itself says it’s only going to reduce emissions by an estimated three megatonnes by 2020.

By comparison, Canada has to reduce emissions by about 200 megatonnes by 2030 to meet the Harper/Trudeau goal.

Which brings us to the real question, which is whether Trudeau is serious about reducing emissions.

If he is, then Canada needs a revenue neutral, national carbon price in the $100 to $200 per tonne range, starting immediately, with all the money raised by government returned to the public in income tax cuts or grants.

This would help people cope with the higher cost of living carbon pricing imposes, and create a real-world demand for lower emissions, and thus lower priced goods and services.

It would do so without having to subsidize giant corporations with billions of public dollars, which every carbon pricing scheme being considered in Canada does.

If Trudeau is serious, that’s what he’ll announce -- called carbon fee and dividend -- this fall.

Anything else will be a government cash grab that won’t lower emissions.

Suzuki's right. It’s time for Trudeau to put up or shut up on climate change.